Tuesday, October 13, 2009
It's a No Go
Book Review for No Going Back by Jonathan Langford, published by Zarahemla Books, 2009
Touted as an appeal for compassion for conflicted LDS self-determined “gay” teens, the novel, No Going Back, is yet another push for accepting gayness, alternative sexual orientation, homosexuality, SSA—call it whatever you like — as an identity within an orthodox church, in this case in minors, ages 12-16. Yes, this is an exploitation of children in an over-the-top attempt to have one's cake and eat it. Sorry, one can't be both a true follower of Christ and proclaim a gay identity.
The book is an overlong, self-conscious one, including vulgar sex jokes among kids, that cannot decide its audience and goes nowhere. The adult characters come across as clueless and self-absorbed as those in the funny movie, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. And the protagonist is a sneaky know-it-all teenager who rationalizes ways to break the rules while fooling Mormons around him (including readers?) into thinking he is an exemplary young man. The difference is, Ferris blows off criticism while the gay teen throws up a lot, has to take antidepressants, and moves away because he allows himself to be victimized by just about everybody and everything. Evidently it is not his fault that he masturbates, oversexualizes his classmates, looks at porn, and acts out homosexually. According to this book, lusting is a wholesome activity for LDS youth both gay and straight. This is a work of fiction in many more ways than one.
Like most attempts at literature today, this piece of writing is one long whine about everything the author wanted to whine about. He has his characters give lip service to religion and the worth of souls, without an iota of real understanding or application, which unthinking exercise is represented as righteousness. The premises and doctrines it is based on are stunningly false. Scientific facts and common knowledge are stunningly absent. The publisher of this book, Chris Bigelow, has said that his fellow Church members must soften their “rigid and extreme” (does he mean "steadfast and immoveable?") orthodoxy concerning homosexuality or the Church risks loss of membership, negative popular opinion, and “further expulsion from society.” Make of that what you will.
As far as ideas for helping sexually wayward kids, this book leaves adults hopeless and empty-handed. Young readers who are socially underdeveloped, whose sexuality is moving in unhealthy directions, and who may be emotionally troubled (all of which apply to the book’s protagonist) are left without direction or assistance in getting to the roots of and overcoming a sexuality dilemma that could destroy an otherwise bright future. In the meantime they are cast afloat, at odds with the gospel of Jesus Christ, and grossly preoccupied with sex. Young people not troubled with sexual issues may be persuaded by this book to jump on the band wagon in the gay parade just because it appeals to the shallowest of human emotions and is oh so cool. Kids are like that. And adults who produce material like this about and for kids would seem to be, well, you make the call.
Our assessment? KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN.
-Janice Graham
*If a young person you know announces he’s gay, do not accept this deception to any degree. Love him, teach him the truth about human sexuality, nature, and God, and, if necessary offer him some cutting-edge professional help. Send questions to our resident expert at Ask Dr. Dan (dr.dan@standardofliberty.org). Or call expert Dr. Jeffrey Robinson at 801-318-9528. Watch for the new book, Chased by an Elephant, the gospel truth about today’s stampeding sexuality, for LDS families. Also Captain of My Soul, a young man’s true story of conquering pornography addiction and homosexuality, a great book for teens and young adults. SoL will keep you informed as to when and where these books will be available.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Gays in the Church? Let's Think It Through.
So often in today's nonjudgmental, PC culture, we simply do not think things through. Here's an example.
There are perilous ideas circulating in our Mormon culture, such as that it's perfectly okay to come out as gay as long as you don't fully act out, that gays can't help their particular sexual feelings, that these people need Church support for their homosexuality, and that homosexuality can be chaste. (And by the way, go ahead and substitute the terms SSA, same-sex attracted, or same-gender attracted for the word gay, if you like. These are the trendy terms some LDS are publicly promoting and adopting perhaps to give the appearance of setting themselves apart from the world and the controversial politics of homosexuality. Don't be fooled. This is an attempt to soften sin and is a self-serving deception. The homosexual orientation is wrong and harmful whether you are a member of the Church or not and whatever you call it.)
We know these ideas have been stated in so many words by a few leaders, but the total opposite is also stated in our scriptures and by prophets and has never been retracted. Take The Family: A Proclamation to the World which states that all of us are either male or female and our assigned gender roles have both temporal and eternal significance. Take President Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness which states homosexuality as a sin in thought and deed that must be overcome in no uncertain terms. Take numerous speeches and talks by apostles. Take the word of God. For every word affirming gayness that can be quoted from a leader, we can give you many, many, many more from the completely opposite viewpoint. It becomes obvious that we must each be taught by the Spirit of the Lord to know the truth on this issue. Of course this is what we should be doing anyway about everything.
Let's think further about homosexuality and the like being accepted in the Church, about gays being chaste, and about gays, however celibate, interacting and serving in the Church. Many mind-boggling questions arise, so many we can't write them all here. But here are a few off the top of our heads:
-When individuals are emboldened enough to publicly proclaim the self-determined gay or SSA label as a personal identity, whether they realize it or not, aren't they joining a highly politicized and radical sexual movement which offers limitless support for unlimited inclinations? Won't they tend to spread their espoused ideologies with others in the Church? (Faithful and otherwise healthy people who are troubled with sexuality problems do not identify or pronounce themselves as gay or SSA. They keep their problems relatively private, get help in overcoming them, and don't give up. They do not wish to be coddled or treated differently than others, nor do they associate with those who have their same problem. This goes for their families too.)
-Endowed latter-day saints covenant to keep their appetites, desires, and passions within God's boundaries. Is a homosexual appetite, desire, or passion within God's boundary for sexuality? Is it chaste to desire to commit sodomy? How do we teach inner chastity to those who claim they are gay/same-sex attracted? How do endowed self-determined gays keep this temple covenant when their identity is based on sexualizing those of their own gender? How do we teach about marriage in the Church when we do not allow gays to get married to each other? Mustn't we teach strict, life-long celibacy to gay Mormons and at the same time encourage marriage, sexuality, and family to straight Mormons? Will gay Mormons think this is tolerant and accepting?
-Some gay Mormons are getting married to the opposite sex so they can receive temple blessings and have families. Still, they claim their sexual desires are oriented toward those of their same sex. How does this work with the marriage relationship? As in adultery, isn't lusting after someone other than your spouse unfaithful? Are gays exempt from adultery in thought or deed while everyone else is not?
-When individuals insist that they are gay wouldn't it seem logical that they have explored and nurtured homosexual ideas and practices, and continue to do so through self-labeling, lusting, associations, support groups, same-sex porn, chat rooms, blogging, writing books, etc. ? And don't they have to keep this up in order to justify their choice to come out? Doesn't anything we hold in our minds expand? Is this chaste?
-Should openly gay males be called to serve as Scout and Young Men leaders and publicly proclaimed lesbians as Young Women leaders? How about Primary teachers? What about self-determined gay kids and gay adults on overnight activities, at youth conferences, scout campouts, girls' camp, and in rest rooms and dressing rooms? Do parents of straight kids want gay kids bunking with their kids? Should two male gays or two lesbians be in the same tent/dorm room? Is this appropriate or safe? How many leaders will turn a blind eye to these risky and unseemly situations?
-How about college dorms and housing at church schools? Do same-sex attracted people room with those of their same sex? Isn't that just like opposite-sex people rooming together? Should we put gay males and lesbians together then? Is that appropriate? How about married housing? Won't gay "married" couples insist on being allowed to live there?
-What about when self-proclaimed gays or SSAs (who supposedly claim they are chaste) serve full-time missions? Do you assign these males male companions when they say they can't help sexualizing their own gender? Is that fair or safe for anyone? Would parents go along? Again, this is presumably like putting males with females. How about lesbians? If we are going on each person's self-determined sexual preference, wouldn't it seem more appropriate to assign a gay male and a lesbian as companions rather than a gay person and a straight person? But is that really appropriate? What will such companionships model to investigators? What will openly gay missionaries exemplify? Will gay missionaries demand to be open about their sexual identity and teach false doctrine?
-How young should we go when accepting or acknowledging self-identified gayness in our ward members? Young adults? Teenagers? Primary children? What if parents proclaim that their child is gay or transgender when he's just a toddler? Must we respect their assessment? (This actually happens. We're not making it up.)
-Will lesson manuals, groups, and organizations all have to be changed so as to accommodate those with alternative sexual orientations? Won't there be an outcry of discrimination if they aren't?
-How about self-proclaimed gays in leadership and teaching positions on all levels? Will these individuals keep their unorthodox and radical views toward sexuality to themselves or incorporate them in their associations, meetings, teachings, and administrations?
-If we accept gayness, don't we have to let gays get married? In our chapels? Or in our temples? Won't all or some of them demand totally equal treatment? Will the Church get in trouble for discriminating against gays if they don't give them all the same opportunities for blessings and ordinances?
-What about bisexuals? Where do they fit in?
-And transexuals? How do we accommodate them? For instance, do we let an obvious male dressed in women's clothes speak from the pulpit and hold leadership positions? Does he attend Relief Society or Priesthood meeting?
-What about transgendered people, those who claim they were born with the wrong gender and have surgeries and hormone treatments to "change" their biological sex? Will a man who claims he has changed his male gender to female still hold the priesthood? Will "women" then be priesthood holders? If not, how is it revoked? Will these "women" attend Relief Society? How about women who claim they are really male? Won't they have to be taken seriously and be given the priesthood?
-What about how we distinguish between the two sexes in so many ways in our auxiliary programs, dress standards, and in the temple? In order to fairly include gays, will we have to make sweeping changes so as to pretend there are no differences between the two sexes and no specific gender roles such as fatherhood and motherhood?
-What should parents teach their children about the self-proclaimed gays in their ward who are outspoken or who are their teachers? Should they teach them that homosexuality is perfectly natural and normal?
-Does anybody really believe that gays don't act out this self-determined sexual identity? How do we define acting out? Isn't coming out acting out? How about masturbating, lusting, same-sex porn, chat rooms, phone calls, meeting, hanging out, "dating," associating with gay-affirming groups and individuals, or reading, testifying of, speaking or writing about, or teaching anything pro-gay? Don't all these behaviors encourage and nurture same-sex sexual attractions including the desire to commit sodomy? Are people doing these things to be considered faithful, orthodox, and sexually pure?
Clearly, embracing the gay identity and ideology, whether ostensibly standing against the physical behaviors behind it or not, would prove problematic in carrying out the outward everyday functions of the Church organization. (The welfare of our individual immortal souls may well be affected also but is a different and much more important topic.) In fact, our whole way of life would change. God-given gender roles, gender distinctions, and sexual morality would be things of the past. If there is to be no more careful distinguishing between the two sexes, all situations that used to retain such order would become inappropriate, unseemly, embarrassing, immodest, and even dangerous. We could not rely on any safe, orderly place and chaos would ensue.
And yet we don't think this essential issue through because that might get us into trouble with other humans. We want to be thought of as open-minded, tolerant, big-hearted. Is being politically correct and popular worth abandoning doctrine, truth, safety, order, normalcy, and God? This is what Flannery O'Connor had to say about it 50 years ago. "In the absence of faith now we govern by tenderness. It is a tenderness which long since cut off from the person of Christ is wrapped in theory. When tenderness is detached from the source of tenderness its logical outcome is terror."
Think about it.
There are perilous ideas circulating in our Mormon culture, such as that it's perfectly okay to come out as gay as long as you don't fully act out, that gays can't help their particular sexual feelings, that these people need Church support for their homosexuality, and that homosexuality can be chaste. (And by the way, go ahead and substitute the terms SSA, same-sex attracted, or same-gender attracted for the word gay, if you like. These are the trendy terms some LDS are publicly promoting and adopting perhaps to give the appearance of setting themselves apart from the world and the controversial politics of homosexuality. Don't be fooled. This is an attempt to soften sin and is a self-serving deception. The homosexual orientation is wrong and harmful whether you are a member of the Church or not and whatever you call it.)
We know these ideas have been stated in so many words by a few leaders, but the total opposite is also stated in our scriptures and by prophets and has never been retracted. Take The Family: A Proclamation to the World which states that all of us are either male or female and our assigned gender roles have both temporal and eternal significance. Take President Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness which states homosexuality as a sin in thought and deed that must be overcome in no uncertain terms. Take numerous speeches and talks by apostles. Take the word of God. For every word affirming gayness that can be quoted from a leader, we can give you many, many, many more from the completely opposite viewpoint. It becomes obvious that we must each be taught by the Spirit of the Lord to know the truth on this issue. Of course this is what we should be doing anyway about everything.
Let's think further about homosexuality and the like being accepted in the Church, about gays being chaste, and about gays, however celibate, interacting and serving in the Church. Many mind-boggling questions arise, so many we can't write them all here. But here are a few off the top of our heads:
-When individuals are emboldened enough to publicly proclaim the self-determined gay or SSA label as a personal identity, whether they realize it or not, aren't they joining a highly politicized and radical sexual movement which offers limitless support for unlimited inclinations? Won't they tend to spread their espoused ideologies with others in the Church? (Faithful and otherwise healthy people who are troubled with sexuality problems do not identify or pronounce themselves as gay or SSA. They keep their problems relatively private, get help in overcoming them, and don't give up. They do not wish to be coddled or treated differently than others, nor do they associate with those who have their same problem. This goes for their families too.)
-Endowed latter-day saints covenant to keep their appetites, desires, and passions within God's boundaries. Is a homosexual appetite, desire, or passion within God's boundary for sexuality? Is it chaste to desire to commit sodomy? How do we teach inner chastity to those who claim they are gay/same-sex attracted? How do endowed self-determined gays keep this temple covenant when their identity is based on sexualizing those of their own gender? How do we teach about marriage in the Church when we do not allow gays to get married to each other? Mustn't we teach strict, life-long celibacy to gay Mormons and at the same time encourage marriage, sexuality, and family to straight Mormons? Will gay Mormons think this is tolerant and accepting?
-Some gay Mormons are getting married to the opposite sex so they can receive temple blessings and have families. Still, they claim their sexual desires are oriented toward those of their same sex. How does this work with the marriage relationship? As in adultery, isn't lusting after someone other than your spouse unfaithful? Are gays exempt from adultery in thought or deed while everyone else is not?
-When individuals insist that they are gay wouldn't it seem logical that they have explored and nurtured homosexual ideas and practices, and continue to do so through self-labeling, lusting, associations, support groups, same-sex porn, chat rooms, blogging, writing books, etc. ? And don't they have to keep this up in order to justify their choice to come out? Doesn't anything we hold in our minds expand? Is this chaste?
-Should openly gay males be called to serve as Scout and Young Men leaders and publicly proclaimed lesbians as Young Women leaders? How about Primary teachers? What about self-determined gay kids and gay adults on overnight activities, at youth conferences, scout campouts, girls' camp, and in rest rooms and dressing rooms? Do parents of straight kids want gay kids bunking with their kids? Should two male gays or two lesbians be in the same tent/dorm room? Is this appropriate or safe? How many leaders will turn a blind eye to these risky and unseemly situations?
-How about college dorms and housing at church schools? Do same-sex attracted people room with those of their same sex? Isn't that just like opposite-sex people rooming together? Should we put gay males and lesbians together then? Is that appropriate? How about married housing? Won't gay "married" couples insist on being allowed to live there?
-What about when self-proclaimed gays or SSAs (who supposedly claim they are chaste) serve full-time missions? Do you assign these males male companions when they say they can't help sexualizing their own gender? Is that fair or safe for anyone? Would parents go along? Again, this is presumably like putting males with females. How about lesbians? If we are going on each person's self-determined sexual preference, wouldn't it seem more appropriate to assign a gay male and a lesbian as companions rather than a gay person and a straight person? But is that really appropriate? What will such companionships model to investigators? What will openly gay missionaries exemplify? Will gay missionaries demand to be open about their sexual identity and teach false doctrine?
-How young should we go when accepting or acknowledging self-identified gayness in our ward members? Young adults? Teenagers? Primary children? What if parents proclaim that their child is gay or transgender when he's just a toddler? Must we respect their assessment? (This actually happens. We're not making it up.)
-Will lesson manuals, groups, and organizations all have to be changed so as to accommodate those with alternative sexual orientations? Won't there be an outcry of discrimination if they aren't?
-How about self-proclaimed gays in leadership and teaching positions on all levels? Will these individuals keep their unorthodox and radical views toward sexuality to themselves or incorporate them in their associations, meetings, teachings, and administrations?
-If we accept gayness, don't we have to let gays get married? In our chapels? Or in our temples? Won't all or some of them demand totally equal treatment? Will the Church get in trouble for discriminating against gays if they don't give them all the same opportunities for blessings and ordinances?
-What about bisexuals? Where do they fit in?
-And transexuals? How do we accommodate them? For instance, do we let an obvious male dressed in women's clothes speak from the pulpit and hold leadership positions? Does he attend Relief Society or Priesthood meeting?
-What about transgendered people, those who claim they were born with the wrong gender and have surgeries and hormone treatments to "change" their biological sex? Will a man who claims he has changed his male gender to female still hold the priesthood? Will "women" then be priesthood holders? If not, how is it revoked? Will these "women" attend Relief Society? How about women who claim they are really male? Won't they have to be taken seriously and be given the priesthood?
-What about how we distinguish between the two sexes in so many ways in our auxiliary programs, dress standards, and in the temple? In order to fairly include gays, will we have to make sweeping changes so as to pretend there are no differences between the two sexes and no specific gender roles such as fatherhood and motherhood?
-What should parents teach their children about the self-proclaimed gays in their ward who are outspoken or who are their teachers? Should they teach them that homosexuality is perfectly natural and normal?
-Does anybody really believe that gays don't act out this self-determined sexual identity? How do we define acting out? Isn't coming out acting out? How about masturbating, lusting, same-sex porn, chat rooms, phone calls, meeting, hanging out, "dating," associating with gay-affirming groups and individuals, or reading, testifying of, speaking or writing about, or teaching anything pro-gay? Don't all these behaviors encourage and nurture same-sex sexual attractions including the desire to commit sodomy? Are people doing these things to be considered faithful, orthodox, and sexually pure?
Clearly, embracing the gay identity and ideology, whether ostensibly standing against the physical behaviors behind it or not, would prove problematic in carrying out the outward everyday functions of the Church organization. (The welfare of our individual immortal souls may well be affected also but is a different and much more important topic.) In fact, our whole way of life would change. God-given gender roles, gender distinctions, and sexual morality would be things of the past. If there is to be no more careful distinguishing between the two sexes, all situations that used to retain such order would become inappropriate, unseemly, embarrassing, immodest, and even dangerous. We could not rely on any safe, orderly place and chaos would ensue.
And yet we don't think this essential issue through because that might get us into trouble with other humans. We want to be thought of as open-minded, tolerant, big-hearted. Is being politically correct and popular worth abandoning doctrine, truth, safety, order, normalcy, and God? This is what Flannery O'Connor had to say about it 50 years ago. "In the absence of faith now we govern by tenderness. It is a tenderness which long since cut off from the person of Christ is wrapped in theory. When tenderness is detached from the source of tenderness its logical outcome is terror."
Think about it.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
No Going Back?
Here is an email we received from an LDS publishing company, Zarahemla Books, and our response.
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:25:24 -0700
> Subject: 11-Year-Olds Coming Out?
> From: chrisbigelow@gmail.com
> To: zarahemla-books-updates@googlegroups.com
>
>
> Primary-age kids coming out to their friends? Deacons and Beehives
> attending gay dances? This article from the New York Times about
> students coming out in middle school shows that this isn't as far-
> fetched as many people may wish.
>
> Coming Out in Middle School
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/magazine/27out-t.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
>
> "Reading this article underscores just how ill-prepared we are as a
> Mormon culture to try to help kids deal with this," states Jonathan
> Langford, author of No Going Back, a new coming-of-age novel about
> a gay Mormon teen.
>
> "We're still playing catch-up from when most LDS kids who experienced
> same-sex attraction were in denial until after their missions. The
> greater openness of today's society means we can't afford the luxury
> of waiting until our kids have a firm spiritual foundation before we
> try to address this."
>
> No Going Back is only $11.53 at Zarahemla and Amazon (regularly
> $16.95):
>
Dear Jonathan Langford and Zarahemla Books,
Please correct me if I'm wrong. You seem to think, as the world does according to the article you have cited, that there is only one way of looking at this issue, as if teenagers, even 11-year-olds, know all about human sexuality and do not need to be taught the proper way to think and feel concerning the power of procreation or even corrected when they get on any one of many wrong paths (which is pretty easy to do in our oversexed culture). It is strange that you talk as if this is not a controversial issue, especially when there is no biological test for homosexuality. The only way we know a person is "gay" is if he "comes out," and here it appears you are trusting that 11-year-olds (physically, mentally, and emotionally immature and inexperienced human beings) can make this momentous judgment that will greatly affect their future if you believe, as I think you do, that homosexuality is innate and immutable.
In fact, most young people who experience same-sex sexual attraction outgrow it naturally. If you ask young people if they would be involved with same-sex sexuality if we didn't live in an oversexed, gay-affirming culture, you (and they) would be very surprised that their honest answer would more often than not be no. This is an acquired, not an inborn, identity, just as proper gender roles and heterosexuality must be modeled and taught. The question for us is, which will we teach and support? Ultimately, these two worldviews cannot peacefully co-exist within an individual, a church, and a society.
Can you possibly have missed the public celebration of homosexuality in our nation's culture and schools, even elementary schools? Incredibly, you say we are failing to support individuals (you mention there may even be Primary kids, Beehives, and Deacons) with same-sex sexual attraction in the Church. I agree that we are at a loss, but my view is the complete opposite of yours. Churches are fast going the way of the world by turning a blind eye to the actual behavior that is practiced, by watering down God's law of chastity, and by accepting and embracing homosexuality as an identity, rather than teaching the everlasting gospel principles of sin, true repentance, and divine love and redemption toward making us new creatures in Christ.
What about the effect of same-sex porn, which is a huge industry? (Surely you know that adolescents can be turned on by anything, including males or females acting out sexually among themselves.) Are parents asking the kids who come out what they have been looking at, who they have been talking to, what they spend their time thinking about and doing? An 11-year-old who comes out could very well be unusually and unhealthily preoccupied with sex and sexuality. This can have many causes. Children are easy prey to secret sexual predators and are easily exposed to pornography and propaganda which can wreak havoc with their developing sexuality. They may be caught up in the political correctness and trendiness of "gayness." They may just want some attention. They may be using this as a way to rebel, or test their parents' unpopular convictions. What a travesty it is when well-meaning (or predatory) adults jump on this adolescent bandwagon and celebrate a phase that will soon pass or that can be healed and corrected. Every parent knows that their 11-year-old is not capable of adult decisions. Sex is a serious thing. It hurts people unless it is channeled in the one healthy direction.
We have a son who as a young teen was lured into homosexual porn on the internet and acted out homosexually to a degree with older men in his late teens. At 19, he came to us for help in overcoming these unwanted behaviors, thought patterns, and feelings. He turned back to the Lord, got excellent professional help, went on a mission at 25, and now at 28 is married to a lovely girl. He has written a book about his experience into and out of homosexuality coming soon entitled Captain of My Soul. This is a true coming-of-age story of a young man's social, physical, mental, and spiritual progress.
If your book matches your sympathies, your book is fiction in more ways than one.
Janice Graham
Standard of Liberty Foundation
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Which Comes First: The Gay or the Homosexual Behavior?
It is our belief that the idea that a person chooses to come out as "gay" before he chooses to engage in homosexual behavior is highly illogical. (We are thinking of the rampant naivete of parents and leaders and the change made in the BYU Honor Code in 2006, apparently through pressures from gay activists and input from gay students, which allows students and faculty to openly identify as gay as long as they don't act on it or advocate it. Incidentally, we think self-identifying is a form of acting and advocating.) It seems more realistic that a person, especially a young LDS person, would not risk announcing he is gay unless he has experimented with it extensively and decided to embrace it, come what may.
Experimentation with homosexuality can take many forms and degrees. We think the most common form is same sex pornography, a huge and fairly recently established internet industry. As one young man related, he looks at porn just to confirm that he is gay, in other words, if same sex porn turns him on he decides he must be gay. Too bad he doesn't know that human sexuality is highly subject to suggestion and stimulation and can take all kinds of bad directions.
Homosexual experimentation can also include fantasizing, participating in on line chat rooms, immersing oneself in gay-affirming literature and entertainment, frequenting gay society and clubs, and more. It seems highly improbable that any young LDS person would claim gayness without first acting out in any of these ways or others short of committing sodomy. Granted, an individual who has been abused as a child or young person (through sexual abuse, pornography, labeling, peer abuse, bad teaching and example, our gay-affirming culture, etc.) may begin to believe they are gay before experimenting. But the actual public embrace of the political and social gay identity is self-determined and quite advanced. Therefore, we submit that homosexual behavior generally must come before private or public declaration of gayness.
To put it simply, given that most people have been conditioned to believe the falsehood that homosexuality is innate and permanent, a young LDS person is not going to say, "I'm gay," or even "I'm same-sex attracted," without trying it out in some way. There's too much at stake. Acting out comes first. To think otherwise is to deny reality.
Experimentation with homosexuality can take many forms and degrees. We think the most common form is same sex pornography, a huge and fairly recently established internet industry. As one young man related, he looks at porn just to confirm that he is gay, in other words, if same sex porn turns him on he decides he must be gay. Too bad he doesn't know that human sexuality is highly subject to suggestion and stimulation and can take all kinds of bad directions.
Homosexual experimentation can also include fantasizing, participating in on line chat rooms, immersing oneself in gay-affirming literature and entertainment, frequenting gay society and clubs, and more. It seems highly improbable that any young LDS person would claim gayness without first acting out in any of these ways or others short of committing sodomy. Granted, an individual who has been abused as a child or young person (through sexual abuse, pornography, labeling, peer abuse, bad teaching and example, our gay-affirming culture, etc.) may begin to believe they are gay before experimenting. But the actual public embrace of the political and social gay identity is self-determined and quite advanced. Therefore, we submit that homosexual behavior generally must come before private or public declaration of gayness.
To put it simply, given that most people have been conditioned to believe the falsehood that homosexuality is innate and permanent, a young LDS person is not going to say, "I'm gay," or even "I'm same-sex attracted," without trying it out in some way. There's too much at stake. Acting out comes first. To think otherwise is to deny reality.
Anatomy of a Fall
SoL, always concerned with the corruption of youth taking place in our sex-saturated culture, was notified about the following face book post and found it tragic and revealing. (For the purposes of this blog we have omitted names, but the author, a 20-year-old, has obviously made his life choices very public.)
The following post stunningly chronicles the step-by-step degradation of a previously fine LDS young man of our acquaintance within the course of a year. Please note that an abandonment of sexual morality in the form of homosexual behavior seems to have come first, then (not neccessarily in this order) homosexual promiscuity, spending money indiscriminately, use of bad language, impulsive feelings and choices, bad health, underage drinking and smoking, an embrace of liberal politics, domestic violence, financial instability and debt, coming out as gay, becoming a gay activist, disassociating from his church, the possibility of STDs, and obsession with body (piercings, tattoos). The sentiments he expresses may include some degree of exaggeration, bitter humor, and youthful bravado, but the reckless and willful abandonment of the traditional values he was apparently taught by his parents seems to be authentic.
We believe the following narrative, that reads like adolescent angst poetry except that it is real and very dangerous, is representative of a trend that is increasingly becoming typical and widespread. What else can we expect from the permissive, Godless, self-indulgent, morally-lost culture young people are having to grow up in today? You can just feel the overall aimlessness, self-centeredness, boredom, rebellion, fear, loneliness, hopelessness, and perhaps mental illness. All taking place in the space of one year. No wonder such young people jump on the limitless-sex activism band wagon. They have abandoned and thumb their noses at everything of most lasting value and importance in life (health, responsibility, marriage, posterity, God, divine redemption) and have left themselves with nothing else to believe in or do but march in the popular and perverse parades of the times they are living in.
Everybody should read this and weep.
In the last year
I joined the Army.
I left my boyfriend ---------.
I spent 6 months training in Hell.
I loved every minute of training (even the moments I hated).
I spent incredible amounts of money on stupid shit.
I got Mono (and still have it).
I made friends that I will never forget.
I turned 20 (on the way to basic training).
I started drinking.
In the last 6 months
I graduated from Special Operations Training.
I flew back to Utah.
I started as a manager at Calvin Klein.
I bought a new car.
I returned my new car.
I got a different new car.
I got a boyfriend (-------).
I moved in to a townhouse with said boyfriend.
I came out to my parents.
I started smoking.
I realized that I am liberal. And I like it.
In the last month
I had a bitter breakup with my ex.
My ex smashed my rice cooker and blender.
My ex "accidentally" knocked over my motorcycle.
I told my parents that I drink (very pleasant experience).
I got a new boy. :D
I started school.
I left my position as manager.
I started the ROTC.
I was kicked out of my house (the ex's).
I moved into a new house.
--Which has no heat
--And no hot water
--And no furniture
--And no fridge
--And no clothes washer
My laptop wireless card went out.
I got a lot of money, and spent it all on past due bills and this laptop.
I decided to really support gay rights and activism.
Came out on facebook, despite my Army friends.
In the next month, I plan to...
Lobby, march, parade
Throw a party at my new place with copious amounts of alcohol
Have my name removed from church records
Get tested for STDs (FINALLY!)
Get something pierced, or the tat I've been wanting
Sell something substantial (my old laptop, a kidney, something)
Try to start working out again
Not fail school!
Go on a roadtrip with my boy and some friends.
The following post stunningly chronicles the step-by-step degradation of a previously fine LDS young man of our acquaintance within the course of a year. Please note that an abandonment of sexual morality in the form of homosexual behavior seems to have come first, then (not neccessarily in this order) homosexual promiscuity, spending money indiscriminately, use of bad language, impulsive feelings and choices, bad health, underage drinking and smoking, an embrace of liberal politics, domestic violence, financial instability and debt, coming out as gay, becoming a gay activist, disassociating from his church, the possibility of STDs, and obsession with body (piercings, tattoos). The sentiments he expresses may include some degree of exaggeration, bitter humor, and youthful bravado, but the reckless and willful abandonment of the traditional values he was apparently taught by his parents seems to be authentic.
We believe the following narrative, that reads like adolescent angst poetry except that it is real and very dangerous, is representative of a trend that is increasingly becoming typical and widespread. What else can we expect from the permissive, Godless, self-indulgent, morally-lost culture young people are having to grow up in today? You can just feel the overall aimlessness, self-centeredness, boredom, rebellion, fear, loneliness, hopelessness, and perhaps mental illness. All taking place in the space of one year. No wonder such young people jump on the limitless-sex activism band wagon. They have abandoned and thumb their noses at everything of most lasting value and importance in life (health, responsibility, marriage, posterity, God, divine redemption) and have left themselves with nothing else to believe in or do but march in the popular and perverse parades of the times they are living in.
Everybody should read this and weep.
In the last year
I joined the Army.
I left my boyfriend ---------.
I spent 6 months training in Hell.
I loved every minute of training (even the moments I hated).
I spent incredible amounts of money on stupid shit.
I got Mono (and still have it).
I made friends that I will never forget.
I turned 20 (on the way to basic training).
I started drinking.
In the last 6 months
I graduated from Special Operations Training.
I flew back to Utah.
I started as a manager at Calvin Klein.
I bought a new car.
I returned my new car.
I got a different new car.
I got a boyfriend (-------).
I moved in to a townhouse with said boyfriend.
I came out to my parents.
I started smoking.
I realized that I am liberal. And I like it.
In the last month
I had a bitter breakup with my ex.
My ex smashed my rice cooker and blender.
My ex "accidentally" knocked over my motorcycle.
I told my parents that I drink (very pleasant experience).
I got a new boy. :D
I started school.
I left my position as manager.
I started the ROTC.
I was kicked out of my house (the ex's).
I moved into a new house.
--Which has no heat
--And no hot water
--And no furniture
--And no fridge
--And no clothes washer
My laptop wireless card went out.
I got a lot of money, and spent it all on past due bills and this laptop.
I decided to really support gay rights and activism.
Came out on facebook, despite my Army friends.
In the next month, I plan to...
Lobby, march, parade
Throw a party at my new place with copious amounts of alcohol
Have my name removed from church records
Get tested for STDs (FINALLY!)
Get something pierced, or the tat I've been wanting
Sell something substantial (my old laptop, a kidney, something)
Try to start working out again
Not fail school!
Go on a roadtrip with my boy and some friends.
Monday, May 11, 2009
On Discrimination, Minorities, and Freedom
Here is a comment we received about the previous blog and our response:
Comment:
Just out of curiosity, do are you intending to say that it it is a legally protected right to actively discriminate against homosexuals? Do you not realize what a slippery slope argument you are making here? If we set up a government that has the power, from the majority position, to take away the rights of minorities, what happens if there is a culture shift and religious folks suddenly find themselves in the minority? Would it still be okay for the majority to discriminate against and deny basic rights to the minority? The basis of the freedoms that you are trying to deny a minority group in this instance is the basis of what enables us to practice our religious beliefs safely. Singling out groups with different ideals and oppressing them hardly seems to me to be the way to ensure religious freedoms. I'm curious as to your thoughts on this. It seems hypocitical to me for us to demand freedom of religion, yet at the same time not extend the same levels of freedom to different groups because of differences in social ideology.
SoL response:
To answer your first question, freedom to practice religion is enumerated in and protected by the Constitution while unlimited sexual behavior is not, so yes, Americans have the rig
ht to discriminate against certain practices that are contrary to their religious beliefs. For instance, churches can refuse membership or excommunicate those who don't follow the church's doctrines. And business owners have the right to refuse service or employment to those who openly defy the owners' moral religious beliefs. And states can choose to preserve the traditional God-based definition of marriage. At least that’s how it’s supposed to be.
As for your concern for minorities, the fact is there is no end of “minorities” people can fabricate. Not only do sexual proclivities and conduct not constitute a true minority (how can they when people change their sexual orientation? – e.g.actress Kelly McGillis just announced she is becoming a lesbian because she’s fed up with men), but special protection for any and every group that comes up with a complaint is not workable. Therefore, we must stick with the basic rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights according to original intent, ensuring them for bona fide minorities such as those based on race which is unchangeable.
There is a conflict, but not the one you are thinking of. The issue at stake here is not all freedom or none, but which particular freedoms will be allowed. Government support of unrestrained sexual freedom and government support for religious freedom cannot co-exist. Which will our nation choose? Will the majority, which is conservative, rule? Or will unchecked rogue judges continue to invent new rights and policies out of whole cloth?
If we rely on the original intent of the Constitution there is no slippery slope here. But if we don't, the way things are going there is indeed a slippery slope toward discrimination of traditional morality and religion. If governmental action continues, as it has recently done, to prefer unrestrained sexual freedom over traditional religious freedom, ignoring the Constitution and its intent, then religious people will certainly be increasingly oppressed and America will no longer be a good, free, strong nation.
Again, the right to freely practice religion is not the same as the right to engage in any kind of sex. The first is guaranteed by the Constitution. The second is not a basic right but one invented by godless sexual revolutionaries.
As for the differing social ideologies you mentioned, America was built and stands on certain ideals. We at SoL believe in conserving the particular worldview embraced by our founders, and by doing so must therefore discriminate against other worldviews harmful to society.
Christianity has always discriminated against the practice of homosexuality while inviting those caught up in it to come to Christ and change their ways. Followers of Christ separate the infinite worth of people from the things they do.
Thanks again for sharing your concerns.
Comment:
Just out of curiosity, do are you intending to say that it it is a legally protected right to actively discriminate against homosexuals? Do you not realize what a slippery slope argument you are making here? If we set up a government that has the power, from the majority position, to take away the rights of minorities, what happens if there is a culture shift and religious folks suddenly find themselves in the minority? Would it still be okay for the majority to discriminate against and deny basic rights to the minority? The basis of the freedoms that you are trying to deny a minority group in this instance is the basis of what enables us to practice our religious beliefs safely. Singling out groups with different ideals and oppressing them hardly seems to me to be the way to ensure religious freedoms. I'm curious as to your thoughts on this. It seems hypocitical to me for us to demand freedom of religion, yet at the same time not extend the same levels of freedom to different groups because of differences in social ideology.
SoL response:
To answer your first question, freedom to practice religion is enumerated in and protected by the Constitution while unlimited sexual behavior is not, so yes, Americans have the rig
ht to discriminate against certain practices that are contrary to their religious beliefs. For instance, churches can refuse membership or excommunicate those who don't follow the church's doctrines. And business owners have the right to refuse service or employment to those who openly defy the owners' moral religious beliefs. And states can choose to preserve the traditional God-based definition of marriage. At least that’s how it’s supposed to be.As for your concern for minorities, the fact is there is no end of “minorities” people can fabricate. Not only do sexual proclivities and conduct not constitute a true minority (how can they when people change their sexual orientation? – e.g.actress Kelly McGillis just announced she is becoming a lesbian because she’s fed up with men), but special protection for any and every group that comes up with a complaint is not workable. Therefore, we must stick with the basic rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights according to original intent, ensuring them for bona fide minorities such as those based on race which is unchangeable.
There is a conflict, but not the one you are thinking of. The issue at stake here is not all freedom or none, but which particular freedoms will be allowed. Government support of unrestrained sexual freedom and government support for religious freedom cannot co-exist. Which will our nation choose? Will the majority, which is conservative, rule? Or will unchecked rogue judges continue to invent new rights and policies out of whole cloth?
If we rely on the original intent of the Constitution there is no slippery slope here. But if we don't, the way things are going there is indeed a slippery slope toward discrimination of traditional morality and religion. If governmental action continues, as it has recently done, to prefer unrestrained sexual freedom over traditional religious freedom, ignoring the Constitution and its intent, then religious people will certainly be increasingly oppressed and America will no longer be a good, free, strong nation.
Again, the right to freely practice religion is not the same as the right to engage in any kind of sex. The first is guaranteed by the Constitution. The second is not a basic right but one invented by godless sexual revolutionaries.
As for the differing social ideologies you mentioned, America was built and stands on certain ideals. We at SoL believe in conserving the particular worldview embraced by our founders, and by doing so must therefore discriminate against other worldviews harmful to society.
Christianity has always discriminated against the practice of homosexuality while inviting those caught up in it to come to Christ and change their ways. Followers of Christ separate the infinite worth of people from the things they do.
Thanks again for sharing your concerns.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
The “They” of Whom We Speak
We at SoL have been studying the sexual revolution/homosexual agenda for so long that we sometimes forget that some people may not know the “they” of whom we speak. "They" are the radical sexual revolutionists and their helpers. Evidently, it is not common knowledge that immense resources and power are pushing this movement. For starters, following is a cursory list of local and national organizations/groups that actively promote or allow public acceptance and legitimization of unlimited sexuality and sexual behaviors. You can find info on them through our website or google them to find out their specific positions, objectives, budgets, and programs. Also see "The New Homosexuality."
Equality Utah, The Human Rights Campaign, Lamda Legal, GLAAD, GLSEN, SEICUS, PFLAGG, Planned Parenthood, Hollywood, NEA, PTA, The Utah AIDS Foundation (in partnership with The United Way), National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association, ACT UP,
NAMBLA.
Please note that the transformation of our culture toward tolerating any and all sexual orientations and conduct, and separating sex and sexuality from man/woman marriage and procreation, did not just happen. Countless organizations, businesses, entities, and individuals participate in, encourage, and contribute to the lawless sexual revolution which made great strides in the1960s and was further fueled by radical feminism. It was fabricated, funded, organized, planned, carried through, and continues to make progress step by step. Many people have been caught up in this cause through conditioning and deception. Young people, especially, are being exploited. In media, entertainment, schools, universities, professional health organizations, and politics, societal blights such as abortion, prostitution, pornography, and homosexuality are no longer controversial issues. In America today sexual revolutionists teach, write, perform, produce, broadcast, publish, sell, lobby, represent, lead, legislate, and receive federal tax dollars.
The sexual revolution is a direct threat to the safety and well-being of the rising generation and our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of speech and religion. For instance, speaking or discriminating against homosexuality has been silenced through misinformation, fear, and intimidation, is increasingly punished, and is now legally threatened by hate crimes legislation. If it continues unchecked both culturally and governmentally, individual sexual freedom will continue to trample truth, conservative values, parental rights, free speech, and religious freedom. “They” will never stop until society has been completely remade in the image of licentious godlessness. The success of the sexual revolution is not due to enlightenment but to the worst in human nature. And as any student of history knows, that road leads to weakness, enslavement, and extinction.
Equality Utah, The Human Rights Campaign, Lamda Legal, GLAAD, GLSEN, SEICUS, PFLAGG, Planned Parenthood, Hollywood, NEA, PTA, The Utah AIDS Foundation (in partnership with The United Way), National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association, ACT UP,
NAMBLA.
Please note that the transformation of our culture toward tolerating any and all sexual orientations and conduct, and separating sex and sexuality from man/woman marriage and procreation, did not just happen. Countless organizations, businesses, entities, and individuals participate in, encourage, and contribute to the lawless sexual revolution which made great strides in the1960s and was further fueled by radical feminism. It was fabricated, funded, organized, planned, carried through, and continues to make progress step by step. Many people have been caught up in this cause through conditioning and deception. Young people, especially, are being exploited. In media, entertainment, schools, universities, professional health organizations, and politics, societal blights such as abortion, prostitution, pornography, and homosexuality are no longer controversial issues. In America today sexual revolutionists teach, write, perform, produce, broadcast, publish, sell, lobby, represent, lead, legislate, and receive federal tax dollars.
The sexual revolution is a direct threat to the safety and well-being of the rising generation and our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of speech and religion. For instance, speaking or discriminating against homosexuality has been silenced through misinformation, fear, and intimidation, is increasingly punished, and is now legally threatened by hate crimes legislation. If it continues unchecked both culturally and governmentally, individual sexual freedom will continue to trample truth, conservative values, parental rights, free speech, and religious freedom. “They” will never stop until society has been completely remade in the image of licentious godlessness. The success of the sexual revolution is not due to enlightenment but to the worst in human nature. And as any student of history knows, that road leads to weakness, enslavement, and extinction.
Monday, April 20, 2009
True Colors
We think these tea party rallies are great -- we attended one in Provo, Utah. It occurs to us that in the sixties it was only the angry, bored, anti-establishment, hippie student-types who protested in the streets. Now, finally, the hard-working silent majority is speaking out, and in a big way. Hundreds of thousands of regular patriotic Americans are fed up with the glutted Fed. We want less government intrusion in our lives! Government taxation has become oppressive, and spending is out of control! Uphold the original intent of the Constitution! Represent the will of the people! Down with socialism! These are the cries of honest to goodness America. (If you haven't read it yet, get a hold of Mark Levin's new bestselling book, Liberty and Tyranny, for a review, or an education, of what America is all about. We underlined practically the whole book.)But you didn't hear much at all about these unprecedented protests on the network news. People gathered themselves together and showed up in huge enthusiastic groups all over the country and reporters essentially ignored it. The incredible fact that the mainstream media did not give this event the coverage it deserved shows its true colors. The incredible fact that the media is calling average, hard-working Americans "racists" and "extremists" for exercising their First Amendment rights and demanding that government taxation and spending be limited shows who these news media people really are. They have been deceived into thinking America is evil at its very foundations and the rest of the world enlightened. They cast aside history, the accumulated wisdom and experience of mankind. They close their eyes to the realities of human nature. They get caught up in shallow social schemes and don't think things through. They thumb their noses at America's unique foundational principles. They forget God.
It makes you wonder how long the anti-America Americans can with impunity turn a blind eye to this grass-roots, red, white, and blue movement. More tea parties are planned for -- you guessed it -- the Fourth of July.
At SoL we regret that America has not significantly shown its own true colors in protesting against the sexual liberationist movement. It has allowed people to be silenced, fired, punished, and called "Nazi," "homophobe," "ignorant," "bigot," etc. for living and speaking up for their traditional, Biblical, conservative family values. Remember what happened in the wake of the passing of California's Prop. 8. If only we had been brave enough to stand against sexual irresponsibility and licentiousness as it boldly paraded itself in our city streets, before it crept into our public policies, laws, schools, entertainment, and businesses.
Could it be that our pocketbooks are more important to us than our children or our faith? Or is it that an oppressive government is just the last straw on a pile of grievances? Whatever the reason, the exciting tea party movement is a sign that it isn't too late for the people to rise up against any destructive direction our beloved country is headed.
Welcome
Welcome to our Standard of Liberty blog in connection with our website. Here, we’ll share our conservative worldview more often and in a more informal way and share your comments as well. Please note that because of the nature of some of the emails SoL has received, we will be screening all comments. Only intelligent, respectful comments and questions will be posted.
We hope you’ll also continue to visit SoL’s website, established in 2005 where you can learn about us, get informed through our news links, and discover additional resources.
We hope you’ll also continue to visit SoL’s website, established in 2005 where you can learn about us, get informed through our news links, and discover additional resources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)